*Note: Louis Giglio was not actually decapitated. LGM and its legal subsidiaries do not favor the death penalty for anyone with the possible exception of people who write contrarian pieces praising Michael Bay or Jewel. We have never been at war with metaphor.

[Erik] My power cannot be overstated. Who should be my next target? I’m open to suggestions.

I’m just a Giglio and everywhere I go,
People know the part I’m playin’.
Pay for every dance, sellin’ each romance,
Ooohh what they’re sayin’?
There will come a day, when youth will pass away,
What will they say about me?
When the end comes I know, there was just a Giglio
Life goes on without me.

i expect outraged emails, to loomis’ employer, demanding he be fired. further, i expect a public statement, from the president of loomis’ employer, stating that loomis doesn’t speak for the university, and that said university in no way condones not actually decapitating people, prior to placing their head on a non-existent stick. further, that mataphor-on-a-stick has no place on their campus.

i note that, given the public opportunity, giglio didn’t repudiate his previous sermon.

Well, kudos to LGM. You’ve gone from ineffectual capita-stick conjunction desires of only a few short weeks ago to successful cranial spike implementation within a few hours of voicing the wish.

I am in awe. What will you do next week? How short will the gap be in future between the wish and the head-besticking?

OT: Am I the only one to see a real oddness about the TP reporting on the issue? It’s like they’ve never seen a Christian before.

One of their less convincing points was outrage that a pastor, in a sermon about sex, mentioned Leviticus! I know! And other parts of the bible which talk about it!

By all means pile on about the very silly suggestions about ‘therapy’ and the unhelpful talk of ‘agendas’ and ‘lifestyles’, but trying to manufacture extra outrage about a pastor quoting scripture – which is all they doing, since they’re not talking about his interpretation of it – that’s just weird.

One of their less convincing points was outrage that a pastor, in a sermon about sex, mentioned Leviticus! I know! And other parts of the bible which talk about it!

It would be mean of me to mention that, in giving a lecture about sex, he did not quote:

1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4 they say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: Lev. 20.10 · Deut. 22.22-24 but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

But everybody knows that the person who said that is completely tangential to Christianity, and is not qualified to illuminate its doctrines.

“It would be mean of me to mention that, in giving a lecture about sex, he did not quote…”

It wouldn’t be mean of you, Mr Macalypse. It would be observant, and entirely to the point.

The selection of relevant texts for an argument is itself a form of interpretation, before one even gets to discussing details. And if that passage wasn’t mentioned (I don’t particularly care to listen to the sermon to find out for myself), that’s something which is worth ragging very hard on indeed – for all the reasons you imply.

But TP’s unfortunate framing doesn’t work hard enough to separate reading or referring to a text – which is a thing that is unremarkable – from a particular interpretation of a text (which can often be horrific). That’s sloppy.

Pastor Giglio was asked to deliver the benediction in large part for his leadership in combating human trafficking around the world.

… anyway, we still have Hagel, so the anti-gay crowd should be happy, that is unless they know what our overall record is outside of such symbolic gestures. Anyway, kudos. Let your efforts and pointy sticks do something a bit more concrete in the future.

His views in the 1990s were pretty awful on this issue, but I need to know more before determining he simply is an awful human being. I’m sure you can find someone though as a symbolic nod to evangelicals, it is a bit harder given their views on gays.

What I want to know is where all the NON-evangelical pastors are hiding these days. If we must have a religious person doing whatever at the inauguration, why can’t we get a moderate Episcopalian or something?

Not sure where my comment went, but I’ll try again. What about the National Cathedral in DC, which is going to start conducting gay marriages? Don’t they have a minister that can do a nice little blah blah blah about God loving all his children?

While “heads on pikes” is an attractive image, for the sake of historical accuracy I should point out that the actual process of impaling had nothing to do with heads. When Erik starts metaphorically doing this to his enemies, then we’ll need to worry.

Speaking of anti-gay forces…
The state treasurer of The State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations today replied to the Bishop’s anti-ssm screed of yesterday by coming out foursquare in support of the pending bill to allow it.
The governor said that if the legislature takes the coward’s way out, and passes a bill putting a referendum on the ballot, he will veto said bill.

A coalition of more than 100 clergy and 13 denominations reaffirmed its support for same-sex marriage Monday, saying “all loving, committed couples should be recognized, respected and treated equally under the law.”

The speaker of the house says the bill will receive a vote next week, and he hopes it will pass.
The state senate president has appointed a ten-member committee (with both outspoken opponents and supporters) to hold hearings.
Maybe we’ll finally join the rest of New England and do the right thing, and Loomis and I can hold our heads up, without the assistance of pikes.